Scientology A Real Religion? (Buddhism, Buddha, church, atheist)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That one doesn't even come close to describing Scientology
2● An organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
That one doesn't describe Scientology either.
3● An interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group; viz: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.
That one works and I'll tell you why.
After watching an HBO documentary recently, I've come to the conclusion that Scientology isn't a religion in accordance with the normal sense of the word; rather, is best described as a psychiatric therapy designed to help people cope with destructive mental and emotional disorders caused by personal contact with malicious disembodied spirits of deceased aliens from outer space called Thetans.
In other words: Scientology isn't a deity-centered philosophy, rather, an ET-centered philosophy.
If somebody has a better description of Scientology than that; I'd be curious to hear about it.
FYI: The inventor of Scientology-- L.Ron Hubbard --was at one time a prolific science fiction writer.
Scientology is the ravings of a lunatic and has no basis at all in any theological discussion..........
Theology, no, of course not; but nevertheless; the IRS granted Scientology the status of a religion so the organization has a legal right to call itself a church.
-
Scientologists progress through a series of expensive self improvements called The Bridge. When they get to a certain location on The Bridge, it becomes possible for them to begin exorcising the Thetans infesting their bodies. The goal is to eventually become clear of the malicious disembodied sprits and so achieve a very high degree of mental and emotional health.
In any event most Buddhist sects, Taoists, one of the Quaker sects, and others have religion in the sense of rituals, holy books, costumed clergy, monastic orders -- and yet, no deity you are commanded to worship.
I don't know what Scientology's attitude towards its adherents believing in gods are, it is probably tolerated but not required or encouraged. It is basically true that a belief in heaven, god, an afterlife and so forth are swapped out for beliefs in a narrative about ancient astronauts and "getting clear" is the objective rather than "being saved" or repenting or what have you. In a technical sense, in terms of what it demands of adherents, it has no deity on offer and could be called atheistic ... but I think most people would think that implied a specific teaching against deities, which to my knowledge they don't have. They claim a sort of quasi-scientific orientation just in their name, so I think it's fair to say it's at least indifferent to the notion of god.
Honestly, Scientology is in my view far too controlling and cultish to be content with warning you about the stern oversight of an invisible man in the sky. They aim to get inside your head and control you more directly.
The word “gasshō” is Japanese for “to place the two palms together.” It’s a sign of respect — but respect for what? Judeo-Christian bowing is a recognition of God’s sovereignty. Does bowing before the Buddha acknowledge the Buddha’s sovereignty? Is it an act of fealty?
Hardly. The Buddha isn’t a diety: he rules over nothing, is sovereign over nothing. Buddha images are a four-fold representation. They represent the totality of existence, our own capacity for awakening, the teachings, and the historical source of those teachings. When we bow we express gratitude for the historical Buddha as a teacher, gratitude for the teachings themselves, respect for our own capacity for awakening, and acknowledgement of the oneness of Being. The Buddha is neither separate from the totality of Being, nor from ourselves. In bowing to the Buddha we bow to ourselves-as-part-of-everything. We acknowledge the smallness of our egos, the vastness of Being, and the way of Enlightenment.
This is, of course, the Buddhist perspective specifically, but it is similar to other Asian belief systems. Bowing itself, as this article points out pretty well, is a central part of social reciprocity and personal expression in and out of religious contexts in Asian culture. It is fundamentally a signifier of humility and deference to others as well as your actual place in the larger scheme of things. This is pretty much an alien concept to Westerners, who think it is some sort of groveling or sniveling for superstitious reasons, as it's the only way they can begin to imagine themselves acting that way, perhaps, if they didn't have what they see as their enlightened understanding of their One True God. But as I say, bowing isn't even strictly religious in nature in those cultures. It is part of everyday life.
But just try to transact serious business with an asian without first mastering the protocol of bowing ;-) A couple of business meetings like that and you will probably throw your back out with all the bowing (and probably commit a faux pas or two). And I don't think you'll suppose that these businesspeople are worshipping each other. They are simply acknowledging each other in a ritualistic fashion, expressing mutual respect, and to some extent, acknowledging a "pecking order" -- or if you prefer, the way things are.
So the Buddhist who honors Buddah or the Hindu who honors his ancestors are symbolically doing the same thing. Some of them, at times, might ask Buddah or an ancestor for help with something, because they believe they are still alive and active in human affairs ... just not all powerful, all knowing, or everywhere present, or even all benevolent, like the standard-issue Abrahamic god. If you don't see a being as absolutely powerful and good, and don't even see it as a god, how COULD you worship it in the sense we normally think of it?
I don't know whether anyone remembers the thankfully brief membership of Daniel McClellan, but he raised some interesting discussion about what religion actually was. How you could define it.
The general view iss that it is simply the belief in some god or other. A bit of thought may change that to an organized form or worship of some god or other.
I would propose another definition
"A belief in some supernatural (outside of normal mundane knowledge) entity, and the practice of the rites through which that entity can be propitiated in order to obtain benefits in this life, or a postulated next life". That would include Scientology and Buddhism, too (the 'entity' being Karma) and indeed the Raelians. It could at a stretch even cover Confucianism.
However, it doesn't seem to cover Jainism. Which is universally accepted as a religion.
Any suggestions?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
